BY 2014, most of the US-led coalition forces would have withdrawn from Afghanistan signifying years of failed policies. It is doubtful whether the lessons have been learnt by Barack Obama who plunged into the problem no sooner than he became president.

As William Pfaff writes in his insightful study The Irony of Manifest Destiny, “Wholly lacking military experience, preoccupied by the world economic crisis and his legislative campaign for healthcare reform, Mr Obama already had accepted the interpretation of the Afghanistan and Pakistan situation generally held in Washington and the press. Indeed, his campaign advisers had proposed a considerably exaggerated version of the dominant Washington scenario, emphasising the risk of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons falling into terrorist hands and seemingly deaf to the risks of powerful Pakistani popular as well as official reactions against US interference in the country’s affairs.” It is a major destabilising force in our region.

The US has profited by the devastation it has wrought, Pfaff establishes. “The ‘war against terror’, in an era of privatised governmental functions, has been enormously profitable to many American corporations. It is reported by the Pentagon that in the second quarter of 2009 the number of private security contractors working in Iraq for the American military rose by 23 per cent, and in Afghanistan by 29 per cent, so that private contractors, which is to say private American business, now provide half the American armed force and military activity in those countries.”

The harsh reality is that the US is both a part of the problem as well as of the solution. Its presence has aggravated crises in the entire region; that has also made it an indispensable party to any solution. States vie with one another to seek its favours. Will they unite to oppose the US plans for a permanent presence in Afghanistan? The countries of the region are not helpless. The US needs their support for a decent exit from Afghanistan. Its policies towards them, most notably Iran, make that difficult though.

The recent parleys between Pakistan and Afghanistan are, therefore, a very promising development. First came the visit to Islamabad of a delegation led by Burhanuddin Rabbani, head of the Afghan High Peace Council, appointed by President Hamid Karzai. A Foreign Office statement quoted Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir as telling the delegation that “it was important that Afghanistan’s neighbours and all countries of the region recommitted themselves to respecting Afghanistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as adhered to the principles of non-interference and non-intervention”. These are the very formulations which a convention on Afghanistan’s security should embody once an intra-Afghan and regional accord is reached.

To these the Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit added that Pakistan has “no ambition to determine the political dispensation in Afghanistan”; an assurance which all must endorse. Even more meaningful is a further amplification he made, alluding to the 19th-century contest in the region between Britain and Russia. “There is no room for a new Great Game pertaining Afghanistan.” It would have grave consequences “not only for Afghanistan but for Pakistan and the entire region”.

Next came the visit to Islamabad on Jan 27 of the Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmay Rassoul when it was decided to set up a joint commission with representation from the political leadership, military and intelligence. It is a forerunner to the tripartite dialogue in the US.

Pakistan was not convinced by the visiting US Vice-President Joe Biden’s assurances on Pakistan’s concerns last month. Indeed, “a senior official” in a background briefing listed those concerns. India-US relations were among them. This is perfectly understandable given the history of India-Pakistan relations.

Afghanistan poses a challenge as well as an opportunity for both. India must respect Pakistan’s strategic and political interests in its neighbour. India would resent encroachment on its interests in Nepal or Sri Lanka. Pakistan must not try to exclude India altogether from any consultations on the future of Afghanistan. India has legitimate economic and cultural ties with it.

The buzzwords ‘trust deficit’ apply very much to this dimension of India-Pakistan relations which cry for a determined effort to end the impasse. By 2007 the Kashmir dispute had reached the gates of a solution. The process must be speeded up and, as part of it, a tacit understanding must be reached which addresses Pakistan’s fears of India’s meddling and India’s fears of exclusion. There can be no real détente if accord on Kashmir is followed by discord on Afghanistan.

The writer is a lawyer and an author.